Jump to content
valaea

Rank All Halo Multiplayer Experiences on 1-10 Scale

Recommended Posts

H1 - 8

H2 - 7

H3 - 7

HR - 4
H4 - 3

H5 - 5

 

H1-3 are all good for different reasons, peoples favourite I feel depends on which one they played the most/played seriously.
HR was the start of a pretty steady decline in terms of enjoyment and population, and H4, well least said about it the better really.

 

H5 has potential, it just needs to do some basic, obvious things to improve the overall experience and preferably get it right from the get go to maintain a population rather than attempting to salvage it a few months later.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Halo 1: N/A

Halo 2: 9

Halo 3: 7

Halo: Reach: 3

Halo 4: 1

Halo 5: 3

 

The lack of strong skill matching and party matching is the #1 reason Halo: Reach, Halo 4, and Halo 5 get low ratings from me. The games weren't necessarily terrible but their matchmaking systems were beyond horrid.

 

Halo 1 gets a "N/A" rating from me because I haven't experienced H1's multiplayer outside of MCC.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

You insist on comparing the base mechanics instead of the entire breadth of the games discussed... You have a fair enough point about JUST the base mechanics, but not about mastery of game mode strategies.

 

The base game mechanics affect the entire breadth of the game. If we were to plot the relationship between base game mechanics and the entire breadth of the game (in the context of game depth/competitive merit) on a graph, the base game mechanics would be the independent variable, and the rest of the game would be the dependent variable.

 

If we are able to say that the base mechanics in CE objectively allow for a greater amount of distinguishment for individuals, which you seem to agree with, then we are able to make several logically objective claims about the game's depth. The existence of forge and multiple game modes are not relevant as long as these base mechanics are universal in their respective games, which they are. There's nothing that can be done in forge to make teamshooting not the only viable strategy in, say, halo 3. There are a very finite about of strategies that are viable in the game, and the base game mechanics dictate this.

 

The "zero bullet magnetism" argument doesn't help your case if you admit yourself that we can claim this value, objectively, allows for individuals to distinguish themselves by a greater margin than if this value were to be higher. Again, you admit that this is an objective claim. People may or may not find this more fun that the former- it's subjective and therefore irrelevant. The objective part of this, which again, you agree is objective, allows us to make more objective claims about the entire breadth of the game since this is dependent of base game mechanics.

 

Going back to the BR vs pistol kill time comparison, it seems to me that you agree the BR's kill time is more than double the pistol's unless you pick up something outside of the BR to buff your kill time, at which point the comparison is no longer valid. The larger point you're trying to make here is that a gun's minimum kill time is the sole determinant of an individual's ability to distinguish their shooting skill. Let's have a thought experiment:

 

Let's imagine that the h2 BR was able to doubleshot without YYing and nothing else changed- CE pistol starts would still allow for a greater ability for individuals to distinguish their shooting skills. This can be validated objectively and mathematically with the game code. For example, bullet magnetism vales, the minimum/average kill time ratio, the number of chances players have to inflict damage per trigger pull (viability of sweep shooting), and so on. Even if the BR could doubleshot without the use of an external factor, which isn't the case, the pistol would still allow for greater individual distinguishment because kill times aren't the only factor influencing this objective trait.

 

Regarding the occurance of teamshooting in CE 4s- there's nothing to disprove. We have actually already gone through this point; just because players teamshoot in CE does not mean it is the only viable strategy in the game. Players aren't forced to teamshoot in CE. In halo 2, players are forced to teamshoot all the time due to the limitations that the game mechanics place on individuals. It's the only viable strategy in the game which reduces the game's depth compared to CE where these limitations don't exist regardless if we're playing 2s, 3s, 4s, etc... Again, this all goes back to the fact that the game's core mechanics influence the entire breadth of the game.

Share this post


Link to post

I didn't play much CE and H2 back then, but with MCC I have experienced enough of the first two multiplayer's to give a judgement. 

 

Halo: CE - 8/10. While its a hugely revolutionary game, I feel elements of it are unbalanced. When I play it, though, its so fun anyhow.

Halo 2 - 7/10  Also a revolutionary game, but some nitpicks about how the weapons feel while shooting them make this one a 7. And even if the button combos deepen the skill gap, they broke the game horribly.

Halo 3 - 9.5/10  My absolute favorite.The netcode was rough in spots, as was the lag, but I strongly feel 3's multiplayer was a perfect combination of the first two games.

Halo: Reach - 6.5/10  I not as harsh on Reach as most. I like the game, but horribly unbalanced abilities and bloom made it play badly.

Halo 4: 6.75/10  I actually liked Halo 4, unlike many of you. Still, it was much too easy of a game, possessed clunky mechanics, and ordinance drops weren't well implemented. I still liked them for personal reasons.

Halo 5: 8.25  343 finally made a well performing Halo multiplayer. Lacks quality maps that previous games had and a variety of gametypes, but the abilities flow beautifully and its competitive (too much, to be honest). Not as social as the older games, but still fun.

 

Share this post


Link to post

H1 - Didn't play enough XBC/LAN games to rate fairly

 

H2(pre-patch) - 6

 

H2(post- patch) - 9

 

H3(pre-patch) - 5

 

H3(post-patch/MLG settings) - 8

 

HR(pre-patch) - 4

 

HR(post-patch/NBNS) - 7

 

H4(pre-patch) - 2

 

H4(post-patch/Turbo) - 4

 

H5 - 7.5

Share this post


Link to post

Honestly probably a little different perspective and although I can appreciate the discussion regarding mechanics and meta of the game I don't think that is influential in creating the "experience" as the people that play the game....the time frame between mid H2 to late H3 early reach had a vast difference in popularity and that is what made halo for me....i hung up my controller and packed the box away 3 months ago after my last remaining online and/or real life friend quit playing....the transition to h4 and beyond drove a lot of players away from the series and to me the game is longer enjoyable without the people I used to play with literally hundreds of people on my friends list who used to be daily halo players have no played in years and arguably that is due to many factors outside the game but still I think plays an extreme influence in one's perspective of the "experience"...end rant and hopefully others can relate as I still stick around as I have general interest in competitive halo but it just doesn't feel the same anymore...maybe I'm just an old bigot who knows

Share this post


Link to post

Just double checked, it's 1.43 for the h2 BR. I was wrong on h3 BR though.

 

156e3hl.jpg

Average kill times man not potential kill times. Average kill times are far more important when it comes to discussions about multiple different weapons.

 

H2 BR has a faster average kill time than the Halo 1 magnum. That chart is worthless IMO.

Share this post


Link to post

Average kill times man not potential kill times. Average kill times are far more important when it comes to discussions about multiple different weapons.

 

H2 BR has a faster average kill time than the Halo 1 magnum. That chart is worthless IMO.

You can't calculate average kill times in development, you design weapons around their potential to force competency.

Share this post


Link to post

H2 BR has a faster average kill time than the Halo 1 magnum.

Good point.

 

The h2 BR has a faster average kill time than the CE pistol, even though the h2 BR's minimum kill time is more than double that of the CE pistol's.

 

The greater disparity between average and minimum kill times in CE says a lot about the game when compared to h2.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Average kill times man not potential kill times. Average kill times are far more important when it comes to discussions about multiple different weapons.

 

H2 BR has a faster average kill time than the Halo 1 magnum. That chart is worthless IMO.

Chart isn't worthless, only reason that H2BR has faster avg kill time is because of the ridiculous magnetism and AA on the game. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.